I'd not put 20% more dmg res as 2x the dmg res plus still doesn't account for higher berserker ac and dmg and immunities. Also quoting all that is a bit excessive....though I wrote it.
Sorry for the massive quoting my friend, I'll delete it and tag you instead.
But I'm completely sure that the 20% more damage reduction will make the Barbarian better than the Berserker. It means that if the Berserker has 150 Effective HP, the Barbarian has 300. This is a huge gap !
Plus, because of the high damage reduction, it's very likely for the fight to be quite long, long enough for the Berserker to become winded. Enrage lasts 60 secs after which the Berserker is winded for 30 secs (-2 AC / Hit / Damage / Lose his 15 bonus HP) and you cannot Enrage while you are still winded.
I'd not put 20% more dmg res as 2x the dmg res plus still doesn't account for higher berserker ac and dmg and immunities. Also quoting all that is a bit excessive....though I wrote it.
You would be taking half the damage. With a berserker you are taking 40% of the damage you would take if you had no resistances. With a barbarian that is 20%.
elminster-fair enough didn't think about it in those terms though about it as 60%vs80% if that makes sense Gotural- Barbarian only get 2 more hp a level potential with core rules a level 20 barbarian can have less health than a level 20 berserker. As for the 20% dmgres difference with Berserker taking 40% and Barbarian taking 20% Seems thats true but regarding effective hp theres still magic dmg get what your saying though the more hp and higher resistance can become a pretty substantial effective hp difference theres still AC to consider which can get quite low especially with buffs. Than there the Dwarven Defender who has 90% potentialy dmg resistance and potentialy higher dmg though doesnt have the spell immunities.
A name? Place a @ before the persons name. So you want Elminster? Summon him with a @Elminister . Be careful. See the space between the fullstop and elminster. It is there so it recognises the name. Hope this helps @JitterBug .
Also capitalization can be finicky when it comes to this site and tagging. For instance I didn't get any notification when @Anduin tagged me just now. When you are tagging you'll also get sort of a list that appears with profiles that match that name (for instance if you start typing in @elminster you'll get a list that will bring up @elminster@elminster22 and @elminster84 ).
I have a highlightable name list as soon as I press the @ and a letter. I actually summoned a El mini ster not elminster. Who in the nine hells called themselves elmister99? Glad to find that out though @elminster !
In fact, because of those 20% more damage reduction, the Berserker would need to do abouttwice as much damage than the Barbarian to win.
And that's completly true for the Dwarven Defender, I am sure it's the best true melee character you can build, and it's really simple to do so.
Let's say they all have 200HP. With 60% DR you will need to do 500 damage to the Berserker to bring him down, versus 1,000 damage to the Barbarian (80%) versus 2,000 damage (90%) to the Dwarven Defender.
With Ring of Gaxx / Potion of Regeneration / Con regen / etc I'm pretty sure a Dwarven Defender is unkillable in melee.
It certainly would be very difficult to kill especially if you had a cleric or druid in your party.
With a Dwarven Defender (and with a 7th level Regeneration spell active) an enemy would need to do over 180 damage/round for them to do anything from a damage standpoint (this is a case of damage vs regeneration rate). With a Fighter/Cleric (at 85%) it would be 120. With a Barbarian (80% resistance) its 90 damage and for a Berserker it would be 45.
What I mean by this is that lets say an enemy attacks my juiced up Dwarven defender (who has 90% physical damage resistance and regeneration active on him). Lets say that enemy does 180 damage in the round.
Well 10% of 180 is 18 damage. That is the amount of damage that would normally get through all these resistances. However, Regeneration (the spell) heals 3 health/second (or 18/round). Basically it would be dead even.
A Fighter/Cleric taking 180 damage in this circumstance would absorb 85% of that. So it would take 27 damage (or 9 damage/round after regeneration is factored in). A barbarian would have 36 damage not absorb by their resistance (leaving 18 damage/round after regeneration). A berserker would have 72 damage not absorbed by their resistances (meaning they'd take 54 health/round worth of damage).
It certainly would be very difficult to kill especially if you had a cleric or druid in your party.
With a Dwarven Defender (and with a 7th level Regeneration spell active) an enemy would need to do over 180 damage/round for them to do anything from a damage standpoint (this is a case of damage vs regeneration rate). With a Fighter/Cleric (at 85%) it would be 120. With a Barbarian (80% resistance) its 90 damage and for a Berserker it would be 45.
Very interesting numbers ! The Fighter/Cleric category can also be extended to Paladins, Rangers and F/M/C
I've covered the ways in which Enrage is better I think so I'll cover were Barbarian rage "can" be better. Here are the strength benefits for above 18 strength.
Ability score Hit adj Damage adj Weight Allowance Bashing
I'l now compare hit and dmg bonuses. 25strength with rage barbarian just cuz has 7hit adjustment and 14dmg adjustment add 1+to hit and +2 to dmg with specialized and get +8hit and +16dmg
Berzerker with 19 strength has +3hit +7dmg than +5hit +9dmg total with Enrage than +8hit +14dmg total with grand mastery added not to mention 1/2 more attacks and -3 attack speed but wait thats not all its possible to get 25 natural strength between bg1 and bg2 so lets see how that pans out 7+2+3=12hit and 14+2+5=21dmg...damn
You're only thinking in terms of battle though. The stat gains from barbarians' rage can potentially enable you to do other things, like break open chests or doors that might otherwise be unopenable. For example, with an enraged barbarian, you can potentially access the locked chest on the upper floor of Winthrop's Inn that has the very valuable gem inside - but is normally inaccessible to anyone who isn't a thief with at least 60% lockpicking skill.
That aside though, what is the big deal with removing exploits? It takes away a part of the fun. Is it fun to type in "giveitem123"? (I don't know the codes) No. It's not. Is it fun to figure out this nifty trick that allows you to take down something incredibly hard with little to no challenge? Yeah, in a way! Don't tell me you never had a group of friends as a kid that you would sometimes run up to and say "I figured out this cool trick for beating *insert name here* in *insert game name here*!" And then you'd show them, and they'd all think you were the sh** for a week or two. It was fun.
Certain exploits need to be fixed, like the Aec'latec one. Why that one and not this? Because that one involves a spell that many people are likely to cast anyway. It's a field clearer, and you're having to deal with several dangerous foes. What does this one do? Gives you a way to watch Drizzt die and get his stuff. Is it something 99% of people would do on their first play-through? Heck no! Is there a nifty trick involved? Yes! It's an exploit, not a bug. Bugs need to fixed because they hamper one's normal gameplay. An exploit is a trick to be used to obtain or complete something faster while working within the game's rules. It harms no one, and it's fun and helpful to those who use it. For those who don't? There are other options or methods and it does not hamper their play-through, so why should they care if others use it? It's none of their business.
THAT'S why the Drizzt invisibility exploit should not be taken away.
Hey @Elrandir, you're still the shiznit dogg! And as to Drizzt, traps my friend, many many traps I can't say it enough: Thieves rock! (Though you'd still have to deal with the rep. hit, which means it's best to take him on at around rep. 12)
I was really surprised when I fought Sarevok under Baldur's gate and my Barbarian was the least one hurt in my whole party lol it's funny how that came to be.
Certain exploits need to be fixed, like the Aec'latec one. Why that one and not this? Because that one involves a spell that many people are likely to cast anyway. It's a field clearer, and you're having to deal with several dangerous foes. What does this one do? Gives you a way to watch Drizzt die and get his stuff. Is it something 99% of people would do on their first play-through? Heck no! Is there a nifty trick involved? Yes! It's an exploit, not a bug. Bugs need to fixed because they hamper one's normal gameplay. An exploit is a trick to be used to obtain or complete something faster while working within the game's rules. It harms no one, and it's fun and helpful to those who use it. For those who don't? There are other options or methods and it does not hamper their play-through, so why should they care if others use it? It's none of their business.
THAT'S why the Drizzt invisibility exploit should not be taken away.
The problem is that they made what I call a 'cheap fix' instead of re-writing the scripts they gave Drizzt the ability to see through invisibility, and what's worse, you can still cause this with a Wizard Eye IIRC.
Certain exploits need to be fixed, like the Aec'latec one. Why that one and not this? Because that one involves a spell that many people are likely to cast anyway. It's a field clearer, and you're having to deal with several dangerous foes. What does this one do? Gives you a way to watch Drizzt die and get his stuff. Is it something 99% of people would do on their first play-through? Heck no! Is there a nifty trick involved? Yes! It's an exploit, not a bug. Bugs need to fixed because they hamper one's normal gameplay. An exploit is a trick to be used to obtain or complete something faster while working within the game's rules. It harms no one, and it's fun and helpful to those who use it. For those who don't? There are other options or methods and it does not hamper their play-through, so why should they care if others use it? It's none of their business.
THAT'S why the Drizzt invisibility exploit should not be taken away.
The problem is that they made what I call a 'cheap fix' instead of re-writing the scripts they gave Drizzt the ability to see through invisibility, and what's worse, you can still cause this with a Wizard Eye IIRC.
Comments
But I'm completely sure that the 20% more damage reduction will make the Barbarian better than the Berserker. It means that if the Berserker has 150 Effective HP, the Barbarian has 300. This is a huge gap !
Plus, because of the high damage reduction, it's very likely for the fight to be quite long, long enough for the Berserker to become winded. Enrage lasts 60 secs after which the Berserker is winded for 30 secs (-2 AC / Hit / Damage / Lose his 15 bonus HP) and you cannot Enrage while you are still winded.
Gotural- Barbarian only get 2 more hp a level potential with core rules a level 20 barbarian can have less health than a level 20 berserker. As for the 20% dmgres difference with Berserker taking 40% and Barbarian taking 20% Seems thats true but regarding effective hp theres still magic dmg get what your saying though the more hp and higher resistance can become a pretty substantial effective hp difference theres still AC to consider which can get quite low especially with buffs. Than there the Dwarven Defender who has 90% potentialy dmg resistance and potentialy higher dmg though doesnt have the spell immunities.
also how do you tag
And that's completly true for the Dwarven Defender, I am sure it's the best true melee character you can build, and it's really simple to do so.
Let's say they all have 200HP. With 60% DR you will need to do 500 damage to the Berserker to bring him down, versus 1,000 damage to the Barbarian (80%) versus 2,000 damage (90%) to the Dwarven Defender.
With Ring of Gaxx / Potion of Regeneration / Con regen / etc I'm pretty sure a Dwarven Defender is unkillable in melee.
With a Dwarven Defender (and with a 7th level Regeneration spell active) an enemy would need to do over 180 damage/round for them to do anything from a damage standpoint (this is a case of damage vs regeneration rate). With a Fighter/Cleric (at 85%) it would be 120. With a Barbarian (80% resistance) its 90 damage and for a Berserker it would be 45.
What I mean by this is that lets say an enemy attacks my juiced up Dwarven defender (who has 90% physical damage resistance and regeneration active on him). Lets say that enemy does 180 damage in the round.
Well 10% of 180 is 18 damage. That is the amount of damage that would normally get through all these resistances. However, Regeneration (the spell) heals 3 health/second (or 18/round). Basically it would be dead even.
A Fighter/Cleric taking 180 damage in this circumstance would absorb 85% of that. So it would take 27 damage (or 9 damage/round after regeneration is factored in). A barbarian would have 36 damage not absorb by their resistance (leaving 18 damage/round after regeneration). A berserker would have 72 damage not absorbed by their resistances (meaning they'd take 54 health/round worth of damage).
That aside though, what is the big deal with removing exploits? It takes away a part of the fun. Is it fun to type in "giveitem123"? (I don't know the codes) No. It's not. Is it fun to figure out this nifty trick that allows you to take down something incredibly hard with little to no challenge? Yeah, in a way! Don't tell me you never had a group of friends as a kid that you would sometimes run up to and say "I figured out this cool trick for beating *insert name here* in *insert game name here*!" And then you'd show them, and they'd all think you were the sh** for a week or two. It was fun.
Certain exploits need to be fixed, like the Aec'latec one. Why that one and not this? Because that one involves a spell that many people are likely to cast anyway. It's a field clearer, and you're having to deal with several dangerous foes. What does this one do? Gives you a way to watch Drizzt die and get his stuff. Is it something 99% of people would do on their first play-through? Heck no! Is there a nifty trick involved? Yes! It's an exploit, not a bug. Bugs need to fixed because they hamper one's normal gameplay. An exploit is a trick to be used to obtain or complete something faster while working within the game's rules. It harms no one, and it's fun and helpful to those who use it. For those who don't? There are other options or methods and it does not hamper their play-through, so why should they care if others use it? It's none of their business.
THAT'S why the Drizzt invisibility exploit should not be taken away.
And as to Drizzt, traps my friend, many many traps